Li-Ion-batteries have a lower self-discharge-rate as normal NiMH-batteries. There are low-self-discharge (LSD) NiMH-batteries like the Eneloop, that's what I prefer. The self-discharge-rates of Li-Ion-batteries and LSD-NiMH-batteries have about the same value. For my part I use both types in different situations. If you use protected Li-Ion-batteries and watch out how you handle them there is only a low chance of failure but I feel safer with have a NiMH-battery in my EDC-flashlight I carry on my body all day long. But if I want to step up the brightness and also keep the size rather compact I use a single-18650 flashlight. If you want to have the about the same advantages of 18650 Li-Ion-batteries in a smaller package you can always use 16340 sized Li-Ion-batteries.
Why no "efficient" AA lights?
- Thread starter Keitho
- Start date
Help Support Candle Power Flashlight Forum
The normal weather in the northern part of Norway is clouded/rain. I charge my stuff with solar panels. With two small 1,5A cottonpicker panels i dont need sun for it to charge. Daylight is fine. Chages my phone etc in no time. But i need two panels, one takes too long to charge in bad weather, two charges just fineWhen crap hits the fan 18650 sucksThere will be millions of AA primary cells around, but no power and sun (if you are wise to possess a sun battery). For example, in Lithuania it is normal to have a week long rain/overcast weather.
Swedpat
Flashlight Enthusiast
I understand the argument that 18650 lights provides much better performance compared to the size and weight than AA lights. But I think you need to take it for what it is: every AA light can use 3 different battery chemistries, and some can use 4.
My main reason for the use of AA lights is the options of batteries. While NiMh is the most economical choice I always can use alkalines. For the highest performance lithium primaries usually are the best. AA alkalines are available in every kiosk and store in the world. And a 1AA sized light actually is less bulkier for carry around in a pocket. If you want to give a quality flashlight as a gift to a non-flashoholic friend the AA flashlight is the obvious choice.
My main reason for the use of AA lights is the options of batteries. While NiMh is the most economical choice I always can use alkalines. For the highest performance lithium primaries usually are the best. AA alkalines are available in every kiosk and store in the world. And a 1AA sized light actually is less bulkier for carry around in a pocket. If you want to give a quality flashlight as a gift to a non-flashoholic friend the AA flashlight is the obvious choice.
Last edited:
vadimax
Flashlight Enthusiast
The normal weather in the northern part of Norway is clouded/rain. I charge my stuff with solar panels. With two small 1,5A cottonpicker panels i dont need sun for it to charge. Daylight is fine. Chages my phone etc in no time. But i need two panels, one takes too long to charge in bad weather, two charges just fine
No sun is OK. But would your panels like to be soaked in water for hours and hours and hours?
leon2245
Flashlight Enthusiast
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2008
- Messages
- 2,335
ANyone know how do ultimate lithium AA's compare in these efficiency calculations, vs. by volume, and by weight?
Just out of curiosity. This only used to seem super important to me too, source of expense & decision maker as to what I buy/carry. THen as the lights themselves have gotten so much more efficient over the years & even eneloop rechargeables too have advanced I guess, just doesn't seem like a big deal to me anymore. AA's everywhere, all the time.
Just out of curiosity. This only used to seem super important to me too, source of expense & decision maker as to what I buy/carry. THen as the lights themselves have gotten so much more efficient over the years & even eneloop rechargeables too have advanced I guess, just doesn't seem like a big deal to me anymore. AA's everywhere, all the time.
marinemaster
Flashlight Enthusiast
Why no "efficient" AA lights?
The Zebralight SC52 and SC53 is extremely efficient on Eneloop AA. It was designed around Eneloop. I just don't understand why people don't get it. 18650 is a specialized battery package. The entire universe of Surefire was designed around and for CR123 battery.
Millions of laptops have been designed around specialized 18650.
Zebralight is as efficient as they get on AA Eneloop. They have more expensive and sophisticated design to do that.
The Zebralight SC52 and SC53 is extremely efficient on Eneloop AA. It was designed around Eneloop. I just don't understand why people don't get it. 18650 is a specialized battery package. The entire universe of Surefire was designed around and for CR123 battery.
Millions of laptops have been designed around specialized 18650.
Zebralight is as efficient as they get on AA Eneloop. They have more expensive and sophisticated design to do that.
Last edited:
jon_slider
Flashlight Enthusiast
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2015
- Messages
- 5,164
AA is fine, Zebralight agrees. I prefer AAA for my carry. Neither is very bright for long, but I don't use them for very bright, I have LiIon for 500+ sustained lumens.
regarding Ultimate Lithium
selbuilt reviews them in lights he also uses other power sources with.. study his runtime charts
see what you can glean.
From where I sit, Ultimate Lithium are expensive, great batteries, weigh half as much as Eneloop or Alkaline.
I put Ultimate Lithium in lights I give away. My lights use Eneloop.
regarding Ultimate Lithium
selbuilt reviews them in lights he also uses other power sources with.. study his runtime charts
see what you can glean.
From where I sit, Ultimate Lithium are expensive, great batteries, weigh half as much as Eneloop or Alkaline.
I put Ultimate Lithium in lights I give away. My lights use Eneloop.
Lithium AAs are the most dense AA battery, batteries aren't really rated as "efficient" typically it is the device that is rated as efficient or not setting up what output in lumens is desired and the more efficient circuit and LED designs typically draw the least current at that rated output and it is up to the battery itself to be able to deliver the current needed.
At very low currents an alkaline and a lithium AA are pretty close to the same capacity, and as current rises the alkaline slowly drops in its ability to deliver current without heating up due to internal resistance soon being replaced by high capacity nimh batteries in the contest with lithium AAs. If you wish to compare to 18650s lithium AAs still lose out in power density and I'm sure the power to weight ratio is also bigger. High capacity nimh AAs and lithium AAs are close in density when current demands put alkalines out of contention with lithium AAs perhaps 10%-15% more or so. The cost of lithium and not being able to recharge them cancel out their advantages over eneloops IMO as king of AAs, either you have lighter and more capacity or rechargeable and dirt cheap cost per lumen ratio over 100s to perhaps 1000 or so recharge cycles.
With the price drop in lithium AAs/AAAs they are more attractive vs top tier name brand alkalines but still too expensive to continually use up in devices. I've found they are great for putting in rarely used remotes due to insane amounts of leaking alkalines I've come across the last 10+ years I can't trust an alkaline for even 6 months in a remote without leaking now. I find it stupid to pay the price they want for top tier alkaline at over $5/4 batteries vs $2 more for batteries that just don't leak at all. Once one of the expensive alkalines leak you want to take all of the rest of that batch out of service for fear they have the same disease pretty much essentially a $5 loss making the extra $2 investment worthwhile. I agree that you only have to recharge an eneloop twice to start making it cheaper than a lithium AA but for devices that over 10 years never use up a battery at all that run twice as long or longer vs LSD nimh lithium batteries do make some sense. I've tried LSD nimh in some devices and while they run well, an alkaline lasts over a year in the device compared to about 60% runtime with nimh in it using them in remote control clocks have me changing batteries every 6 months instead of 14 months. What I need to probably do is figure out a value of a capacitor to solder across the battery terminals to supply enough power for about 5 minutes of runtime to swap nimh batteries in/out that would make them more attractive to use.
Re: Why no "efficient" AA lights?
Sounds like violent agreement lovecpf: Eneloop are power-to-weight- and power-to-volume-efficient for their chemistry, and Li-ion are more power-to-weight efficient than NiMH. More violent agreement: different battery sizes and different battery chemistries are better suited for different purposes. More violent agreement: power-to-weight efficiency isn't always the most important aspect of purchase or carry decisions.
The notion that 18650 is "specialized" is interesting to me...global alkaline battery sales (of all cell sizes) are around $10 billion (in 2015, according to The Economist), while the 18650 global market for that single cell size is $6 billion (according to energycentral). At some point, we'll have to admit that 18650 Li-ion are nearly as prevalent, or even more prevalent, than any particular size of alkaline cell, even though supermarkets might not carry individual 18650 cells for the near-term future. Electronic gadgets all are designed with a particular cell size/voltage/current in mind, making every battery-operated device "specialized". With worldwide production of primary and rechargeable cells near parity, and with the specific electronic device designs for each size/chemistry, I find it hard to call one size/chemistry (18650) "specialized" without using the same word to describe alkaline cells and devices.
Sounds like violent agreement lovecpf: Eneloop are power-to-weight- and power-to-volume-efficient for their chemistry, and Li-ion are more power-to-weight efficient than NiMH. More violent agreement: different battery sizes and different battery chemistries are better suited for different purposes. More violent agreement: power-to-weight efficiency isn't always the most important aspect of purchase or carry decisions.
The notion that 18650 is "specialized" is interesting to me...global alkaline battery sales (of all cell sizes) are around $10 billion (in 2015, according to The Economist), while the 18650 global market for that single cell size is $6 billion (according to energycentral). At some point, we'll have to admit that 18650 Li-ion are nearly as prevalent, or even more prevalent, than any particular size of alkaline cell, even though supermarkets might not carry individual 18650 cells for the near-term future. Electronic gadgets all are designed with a particular cell size/voltage/current in mind, making every battery-operated device "specialized". With worldwide production of primary and rechargeable cells near parity, and with the specific electronic device designs for each size/chemistry, I find it hard to call one size/chemistry (18650) "specialized" without using the same word to describe alkaline cells and devices.
marinemaster
Flashlight Enthusiast
Why no "efficient" AA lights?
AA gets no respect in this forum. That $6 billion figure for 18650 is likely 90% laptop batteries so that is specialized to me. The rest likely is flashlights and who knows what else. 98% of the population has no idea what a 18650 battery is. I believe 98% of population knows what AA is. That is where the focus is. Lithium such as 18650 could be dangerous, expensive to some, need recharge, etc. not easy and complicated.
Current surge in billions of smart phones and their rechargeable batteries also in the billions are EASY to charge and use, unlike 18650. 98% of the population has no idea what kind of battery either NiMH or Li-ion a smart phone uses.
AA will just get the beating in the meantime for not being efficient.
AA gets no respect in this forum. That $6 billion figure for 18650 is likely 90% laptop batteries so that is specialized to me. The rest likely is flashlights and who knows what else. 98% of the population has no idea what a 18650 battery is. I believe 98% of population knows what AA is. That is where the focus is. Lithium such as 18650 could be dangerous, expensive to some, need recharge, etc. not easy and complicated.
Current surge in billions of smart phones and their rechargeable batteries also in the billions are EASY to charge and use, unlike 18650. 98% of the population has no idea what kind of battery either NiMH or Li-ion a smart phone uses.
AA will just get the beating in the meantime for not being efficient.
Last edited:
Re: Why no "efficient" AA lights?
I have mad respect for AAs, but none for AA lights that can't maximize output and runtime on AAs.
I have mad respect for AAs, but none for AA lights that can't maximize output and runtime on AAs.
jon_slider
Flashlight Enthusiast
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2015
- Messages
- 5,164
Re: Why no "efficient" AA lights?
isn't it just a function of brightness?
10 lumens with Mad Runtime, or 500 lumens for 3 minutes, like Zebra SC5?
example?
isn't it just a function of brightness?
10 lumens with Mad Runtime, or 500 lumens for 3 minutes, like Zebra SC5?
Re: Why no "efficient" AA lights?
Actually just about every battery powered tool made these days uses 18650 batteries in them now along with battery powered weedeaters and trimmers and saws also. A lot of power banks use 18650 batteries and I'm betting many other rechargeable devices are using the 18650 battery also. From what I've heard recently alkaline and lithium primary AA sales are slowing down as many devices are going to lithium ion batteries. In the next decade I expect lithium ion batteries to surpass alkalines in usage in the 18650 size or perhaps the 21700 size (or close to that).
Re: Why no "efficient" AA lights?
Maximize runtime for any given output. I use ZL's AA lights as the gold standard, so pretty much anything and everything that falls short, I have no respect for.
Maximize runtime for any given output. I use ZL's AA lights as the gold standard, so pretty much anything and everything that falls short, I have no respect for.
